ALFRED MANHEIM, APPELLANT,
v.
FORD MOTOR COMPANY, A CORPORATION, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1967-09-13
No. 66-521
Before CHARLES CARROLL, C. J., and PEARSON and SWANN, JJ.
201 So. 2d 909 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1967) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

This case involves a prior judgment by the Florida District Court of Appeal affirming a summary judgment, which was later quashed by the Florida Supreme Court. The District Court of Appeal, following the Supreme Court's mandate, vacated its prior judgment, reversed the summary judgment, and remanded the case for further proceedings.


Holding

The District Court of Appeal must vacate its prior judgment, adopt the Supreme Court's opinion and judgment as its own, reverse the summary judgment, and remand the case to the circuit court for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court's decision.


Key Quotes

“quashed this court's judgment of affirmance with directions for further proceedings”

Describes the action taken by the Florida Supreme Court on the District Court of Appeal's prior judgment.

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The Florida District Court of Appeal had previously affirmed a summary judgment granted by the Circuit Court for Dade County. Upon review by certiorar…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

ORDER ON MANDATE

PER CURIAM.

Whereas, the judgment of this court was entered on January 31, 1967 (194 So.2d 54) affirming the summary judgment of the Circuit Court for Dade County, Florida, in the above styled cause; and

Whereas, on review of this court’s judgment, by certiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida, by its opinion and judgment filed July 19, 1967 (201 So.2d 440) and mandate dated August 7, 1967, now lodged in this court, quashed this court’s judgment of affirmance with directions for further proceedings ;

Now, therefore, It is Ordered that the mandate of this court issued in this cause on February 7, 1967 is withdrawn, the opinion and judgment of this court filed January 31, 1967 is vacated, the said opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is herewith made the opinion and judgment of this court and the summary judgment appealed from in this cause is reversed and the cause is remanded to the circuit court with directions to proceed in accordance with the opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida. Costs allowed shall be taxed in the circuit court (Rule 3.16(b) Florida Appellate Rules, 32 F.S.A.).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Royal Palm Corporate Ctr. Ass'n, Ltd. v. Pugliese, III, 89 So. 3d 923 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)
    …d statutes. . A general prayer for relief in a foreclosure action is sufficient to permit a court in its discretion "to render a deficiency degree if an appropriate motion therefor was made.” Boyles v. Alt. Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n of Ft. Lauderdale, 201 So. 2d 909, 910 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967). A plaintiff cannot pursue an action on the note or guaranty where the plaintiff has prayed for the court to exercise its equity jurisdiction and the court has adjudicated the issue, either granting or denying judgment.See P…
  • Steketee v. Ballance Homes, Inc., 376 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)
    …iv.P. 1.420 to dismiss any action when good cause is not shown for inactivity in the case for a period of a year. Colmes v. HOCO, Inc., supra; Galloway v. Musgrave, 154 So. 2d 846 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963); Boyles v. Atlantic Federal Savings & Loan Ass’n., 201 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967). If the deficiency is denied on any other ground, the court must set forth equitable considerations which constitute sound and sufficient reasons for such action. Galloway, supra; Hamilton Investment Trust v. Escambia Developers,…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw